Jump to content

2.6 F head or 2.25 diesel?


SMASH
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone this is my first post to the forum..
so i have two series 2a landys one is a 2.6 F head and the other 2.25 diesel and am going to do ONE up. What engine do people think is the better one? i am in Australia and will be using the rig for long distance touring. So the question which one? i prefer the diesel personally even though it is a bit lower on power

Cheers Luke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.25 diesel has relatively good economy for what it is, but it's pretty gutless.

The 2.6 didn't get to my neck of the woods (NZ) in huge numbers so if it's relatively good nick then in my personal opinion use the 2.6 (but that's just what I like)

The Holden red motor is good for no one :D do not give in to the dark side! Although if you do choose a Holden lump, use the 161 or the 173. 186 and 202s are too big for the vehicle and although you'll accelerate faster, you'll still end up at the same speed on the motorway as a 2.25 petrol landy (55mph) screaming along. Just my personal thoughts :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.25 diesel has relatively good economy for what it is, but it's pretty gutless. The 2.6 didn't get to my neck of the woods (NZ) in huge numbers so if it's relatively good nick then in my personal opinion use the 2.6 (but that's just what I like) The Holden red motor is good for no one :D do not give in to the dark side! Although if you do choose a Holden lump, use the 161 or the 173. 186 and 202s are too big for the vehicle and although you'll accelerate faster, you'll still end up at the same speed on the motorway as a 2.25 petrol landy (55mph) screaming along. Just my personal thoughts :)

I was only partly joking when I suggested the Holden - my brother runs one in a 67 IIA out of Perth in WA. With 3.54 diffs and 7.50 tyres it cruises well,is smooth,good on fuel and probably 1/2 the weight of the LR6.He goes on some pretty decent off road camping trips with it. Parts are 50c from Repco too.For him it was an easy choice,and there are plenty parked up on country properties where the owners are happy to part with them for very little as a s/h parts source.

And the "Six" badge that came with the original conversion looks cool too.

Just be thankful I didnt suggest a Falcon motor !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very thankful you didnt suggest a Falcon motor hehe

Yes, I know where you're coming from with the Holden motor point of view. It's a hugely common conversion here and combined with 3.54s it's a good answer.

We can all agree that a 6 of some description is a good way to go :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys yeah not keen for a conversion ahahah the diesel needs more work but the gearbox is good and the 2.6 is a good motor the box needs big work but and i forgot to say they are both 109"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.6 but check the dizzy drive quill bronze gear as they wear , and then suddenly fail. as do the fibre gears on the front of holden lumps , unless you rev them a bit too much , so they throw number 3 rod thru side !! (Holdens that is)

The real beaut engine for a swap is the chrysler Hemi 245 (out of a valiant), pull like a train and will rev as long as you like , need to change your diffs for best economy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is range going to be a consideration - in which case its advantage diesel as whatever the merits of the 6 cylinder Land Rover engine - economy wasn't one.

Apart from the bellhousing the gearboxes are similar. If both vehicles are S3's you should be able to put the 'diesel' bellhousing straight on the front of the 6 cylinder gearbox. (Replace the 3 3rd/4th synchro springs while you're there for reliability - RTC 1956 - cost - minimal) You can do the same job with a 2a box - clutch is a bit more involved.

I'm assuming neither is a '1 tonne' - in which case the gearbox is different - transfer box I think)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always liked the creamy and relaxed power-delivery of the smooth-and-torquey F-head sixes, though I really wonder why Land-Rover never more-widely offered a 3-litre F-head six using the twin-carb Weslake-head engine they were using in the 1960s 'P5' luxury-saloons.

[OK, they did produce a few such vehicles for the US market but somehow they held this option back for rest-of-world sales]

I also think that LR - since they were part of the 'BMC/British Leyland' menagerie back in the 1960s - could have really driven ahead if they had offered the 4-litre "FB60" IoE engine [175BHP in magisterial silence and and oodles of torque] from the 'Vanden Plas 4-litre R' luxobarge (they already had production-rights to this engine) or, if they had been desperate, the 150BHP twin-carb 3-litre "C"-series lump as used in Austin Westminsters and Healey-3000s of the day.

--Tanuki

"Badgers are never the answer but always the problem".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

Not sure if they are available in the antipodes, but why not go for a 200 Tdi engine from a discovery? The Series diesel is a disaster unless you like being in second gear. The 2.6 is a great engine, or rather was in 1960. It makes a wonderful noise and is almost without vibration, but it drinks fuel like there is no tomorrow; it is not unusual to get down into single figures! The Series 1 in my little pic has a 2.6; it goes to shows on a trailer towed by my 200 di powered 109 to save fuel!

The 200 Tdi conversion is not difficult, even easier if you do away with the turbo. The unblown engine has more power and torque than a Series 4 cylinder petrol and should give over 30 miles to the gallon.

For more details Google Glencoyne Land Rover and look at his website.

I can recomend this engine if you want a road vehicle with no problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
I'm not sure disaster is right? I had one that could pull overdrive top happily with a caravan on the back. But it was looked after....

I had a couple which were "Cossetted" and were only suitable for towing in O/D top when going downhill !!! even blueprinted one to latest LR specs but wa still a dispointment , replaced it with a 3.8 leyland diesel engine , now that really would pull ! JMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither engine is really suitable for Australian conditions. The 2 1/4 Deisel is gutless and slow, and will cost far more in engine and gearbox repairs than what it would save in fuel costs over the 2 1/4 petrol. The 2.6 F head burns oil, exhaust valves and petrol like no other, and is quite gutless for a 160 cu in engine. The 161 cu in Holden engine eats it for breakfast, but they require a different carburator to operate efficiently on steep gradients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with bill, the 161 motor would be my choice if I was the even consider swapping a silly red thing into my landy. A 200di is a nice middle-ground choice if petrol isn't readily available as they are a robust and economical unit. Plus IIRC they bolt straight onto the series mounts if you use the discovery version. I'm not sure what prices discoveries go for in Oz but in NZ they still ask a fair whack for a buggered disco with motor or even a motor by itself, so the conversion isn't common here that I know of

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy